Why would you think that? Before the general election, I think this is a significant possibility. If he somehow manages to win, I think this is a *very* strong possibility. King was shot and killed, JFK was shot and killed, RFK was shot and killed (while still a candidate), Regan was shot and wounded. Conspiracy theories aside (mind you, I DO believe that there was a conspiracy in the cases of MLK and JFK), these assassinations were carried out by singular individuals using regular firearms. It's just not that hard. Now, consider we live in an age where it's trivial for anyone with an IQ over 85 to go on the internet and figure out how to make a bomb. Consider the number of people in this country who project religious theories onto the president of the United States--the "leader of the free world", this man who's supposedly either going to save America or turn it into the Babylon of Revelations. Consider that slavery and racism had and still have biblical justifications (Mark of Cain, Curse of Ham)--though I personally don't think that race will be as important as his contact with Muslim cultures. The fact that Obama is so well liked among the liberals will only serve to make the nutjob religious conservatives that much nuttier and paranoid.
Interesting post. I stayed away from this for a while because I wanted to see where it would run. I to am principled, but I will not be voting Obama. And oddly enough for many of the reasons that you cite. Including (and especially) the fact he had no clue about the differences between a Persian and an Arab, or a Sunni and a Shi'ite until he was briefed on the topic. I personally know one of the folks who was in on the session. As a Chicagoan who is African American, and thinking, I'm getting a lot of direct info on this race this time that I CAN COUNT ON as facts. No press/handlers massaged statements, no media hype or doctoring. And many of my friends and associates who know how I roll (giggle), have asked me for honest insights and updates. Your point on voting against is so true. And it's heavy in both parties. Neither candidate has a real reason to vote for them. They'll both be running campaigns basically saying vote for me because I'm not the other guy! Advisors in both parties have a define the other guy mentality and that has a heavy influence in the public realm that doesn't want to be politically incorrect. We have a healthy (???) knowledge that both camps must hide and minimize certain negative truths about their guy. And we all know that in politics the truth really hurts. It's the one area of the playground where complete disclosure of facts works against the guy offering the information. Truth! Neither one of these candidates has a clue about how business works. Both of these candidates are flawed in their learning. Did you take a look at either of their school GPA's? Obama was no standout in school. He talks well with coaching and teleprompting, that's it. I've played basketball against him. He's left-handed and right footed, with absolutely no powergame. Just like his campaign. He's the guy in the shootaround with a bunch of white guys who gets choosen because of a stereotype. I claim he's soft, becuse he is! (And no he doesn't want Osama killed. Rather, he should have his day in court. And I can see the venue easily being the Ninth Circuit. Such a Hollywood show they'll produce.) John McCain, the flaws there are about as lengthy. Even with his long track record, which actually stinks if your a republican, he sucks. The party is struggling because McCain is their version of "Jimmy Carter Inside." His answer or solutiuoin must always involve waffles. His strongest point is that he is a maverick. Has anyone actually looked at the definition of the word? And check this out: 144 Moby Thesaurus words for "maverick": Bohemian, Brahman, Indian buffalo, agitator, alien, ass, aurochs, beat, beatnik, beef, beef cattle, beeves, bigot, bison, bitter-ender, bossy, bovine, bovine animal, brawler, breakaway, buffalo, bull, bullethead, bullock, calf, carabao, case, cattle, character, cow, crackpot, crank, critter, dairy cattle, dairy cow, deviant, diehard, dissenter, dogie, dogmatist, donkey, dropout, eccentric, extremist, fanatic, far out, flower child, freak, free and easy, fringy, frondeur, hardnose, heifer, heretic, heretical, hermit, heterodox, hippie, hobo, hornless cow, informal, insubordinate, insurgent, insurrectionary, insurrectionist, insurrecto, intransigeant, intransigent, kine, kinky, kook, last-ditcher, leppy, lone wolf, loner, malcontent, meshuggenah, milch cow, milcher, milk cow, milker, misfit, mule, muley cow, muley head, musk-ox, mutineer, natural, neat, nonconformist, nonjuror, not cricket, not done, not kosher, nut, odd fellow, oddball, oddity, offbeat, original, outsider, ox, oxen, pariah, perverse fool, pighead, positivist, purist, queer duck, queer fish, queer specimen, rara avis, rebel, revolter, revolutionary, revolutionist, rioter, screwball, sectarian, sectary, solitary, standpat, standpatter, steer, stickler, stirk, stot, subversive, swinger, traitor, tramp, type, ugly duckling, unconformist, unconventional, unfashionable, unorthodox, way out, wisent, yak, yearling, yippie, zealot, zebu Which one of those words or definitions instills confidence that you can actually FOLLOW his lead? Which one clearly says he has a clue about what he's doing? Let me get this straight. We honestly respect his ability as a leader, primarily because he was captured and survived? McCain lives on the sympathy/empaphy dime. PERIOD! He has no solutions people!! If he's right about something and he sees you following his direction, you have to be concerned that he won't change direction in the middle of the game so he can stay a maverick. His personal version of shaking things up so-to-speak. We generally hide our concerns in the knowledge that the candidates will surround themselves with sound and solid people to help them out. Ok. Again BOTH of these need to be put out to pasture. As does the current occupant of the office, for other reasons. Obama's sphere of confidants stinks and is truly status based. They're mostly angry, radical, and controversial. Not because the press is shining that light on them, but because they are. That's how they make their respective livings. If they didn't take controversial postures, they'd have no status, clout, and most importantly WORK! Folks, they're important because they'll scream fire in the theatre. Even if there isn't one! That's what they do for a living!! As for fiscal plans, if the need arose, neither of these candidates can balance their own check book. And we have them to choose from for running the country. McCain has no plan. Obama is respending the same dollar on at least ten plans that he is proposing to create. And we're hoping they choose a sound fiscal mind to back them up. Another weakness play. Pick me because I am going to be listening to so-in-so for advice. No one even remotely believes that any of the contestants has a well rounded knowledge base inside. We'll truly be choosing between the best of two lousy once again! Fortunately they can only be in charge a maximum of eight years. Unless their wives run. Hey wait, didn't we just have an occurance of that recently. My memory is a bit fuzzy there. Take a minute out there and look at all the truths about these candidates, then take charge of your own direction because neither of these have a clue. As a hard working taxpayer I'd really appreciate it. Thanks!!
Rock on, CanyonMan! It seems that far too many people on this thread are trying to put voters into a box. Women vote this way, blacks vote this way, blah, blah, blah. All I can say is that based on my experience as a Chicagoan, having seen who Obama associates with (the political machine, not Rev. Wright) makes me not want to vote for him. In my eyes, it's like voting Daley into the oval office. I don't give a damn what color he is. Hey, those of you from Illinois, would you want BLAGO to be your President? I think not.
And knowing Chicago and its political backdoors as we do, this whole thing sings of Daley and the machine. The absence of them in the forefront speaks very loudly to me. The last time a Daley had this type of link was with Kennedy. I'll give you some insight that a friend of mine shared with me about a month ago. Obama was seriously considering offering the VP spot to Richie! That would go a long way to putting together the state of Michigan as well as Florida. Daley (and the machine) has solid, visible connections in both states. That would also push the Clintons clean off the page. At the same time it gives him root support with the Latino community. The selection would not surprise me. It would explain several trade missions that Chicago is currently exploring and, go a long way in cementing the olympic bid.
I'm sick to my stomach. Richie is strictly mayor material, nothing more. However, I'm not quite sure he'd even want more than that. He loves the phony public appearances - not sure if he actually would want a job where those appearances should accomplish more than 'making him look like a good guy.'
I can only imagine David Axelrod's reaction when he first laid eyes on Obama. "Here's a guy who thinks like Daley, governs as incompetently as Daley but is bi-racial and speaks in complete sentences. We can mold him into being the Boss of America!â
Richie won't take it. But he'll be integral in the ultimate selection. And that's the connection he craves.
Axelrod has structured this whole thing and it's he (and to a lesser extent Daley) who will create and control the power.
Canyonman: I'm for Obama mainly for two reasons: 1. Since we lack the courage to make it right (e.g. forcibly partition the country) we need to get the hell out of Iraq. Now. We're wasting far more money over there than Obama could ever waste on social programs. We're also directly empowering al-Qaeda by disillusioning millions of Sunnis. 2. The Republicans need a bitch-slapping. Now, this may sound petty but I assure you it is not. I WANT to vote republican. I want to vote for smaller government. Unfortunately, the neoconservatives have managed to completely destroy the idea of Republican=small government=less spending and they've replaced it with Republican=the Christian party. I'm hoping that the more this strategy fails, the more politicians will abandon it. It's not so much a political reason for voting for Obama as it is a meta-political reason. As far as the political machine goes, yeah it's scary but not as scary as Karl Rove's 2004 masterpiece of manipulative bullshit. On the whole, I'm not sure I care whether the Democrats or the Republicans are the most phony--I'm just trying to minimize the damage.
Obama can do a ton more damage because, it's here that his plans would be put into place! I'm old enough to remember the shifts in the African American mentality as over-help was offered. By that I mean resources without action/active requirements. And it's a mentality shift that Obama touts as his answer. Make no mistake, this is very dangerous. His stances are book smart and visionary if you have none. He has been coached/trained to mimic the lines and intensity that motivates. But there's no meat on that sandwich. It's his posture that the government must offer EVERY possible hand up, no matter the fiscal costs and that is damning. He feels we owe it to those in need no matter the reason that they are in that position. His over-idealistic approach says that even those who have done everything counterproductive that they possibly can should be given the maximum efforts and fiscal aid possible. Speaking from personal conversation there, excuse me. Bitch-slap? Over-the-top responses always have the ability to garner over-the top responses. I am constantly amused when I have friends who are life-long, bleeding, bred democrats complain about a party that they say they would never join. "Not black enough" I'm told it is. And any African Americans who try to intergrate the party are looked at as traders in the community. Sounds like perpetual losing is the game plan there. Check this. The democratic party, to even remotely have a chance of winning national elections, REQUIRES in excess of 88% of the African American community to vote democratic. It is an understood, given thing that the party knows that they have to do nothing to get either. They fein effort and concern every election but let's face it, as a people we're in that basket for life. There is no other group that MUST do this. I call it voluntary slavery. Whether you receive anything or not you must vote that way. Happy or not, you have no choice. The same concerns that Martin Luther King claimed as needed changing are still there according to many accounts. And it's not the fault of the republican efforts either. The montra of "we've come so far and still have far to go," is just that. There's comfort (and cash flow) in that statement. Be clear, the power of personal success is in the ability of the individual. Not the party, nor the masses. I dare say that your life would be the same as it is, Karl Rove or not. Don't believe the hype that tells you otherwise. Slowly back away from the pundit provided, talking points kool-aide. The political types will not abandon that posture because it motivates, YOU! They need anger at YOUR motivation base for you to do the bidding. The two parties operate from different foundations. Hence the appearance of not being able to come together. The republications are coming from a position of "empower the self." The democrats operate from the position of "government is your strength." Republicans would tell you that, "YOU can do." Democrats would tell you that, "With the government leading, we can all." The stances appear to be diametrically opposed on the surface. The rudder is the point of contention. Democrats want one rudder, under their control. The republicans tell you that your ship has its own rudder. And no, the truth does not lie somewhere in the middle. The true overlap is very small and always brief. Excuse my digression, I always am amazed how clear it is to me. I've helped far too many folks become solvent mentally, fiscally and physically without government intervention. And none have looked back to find the flaws in their successes. They don't feel guilty about personal achievements any more either. They truly understand the small footprint that government needs to leave in their personal lives. And they're truly, truly, hatin' taxes now (giggle)!!